" there is an honorable position within the conservative movement for the positions that GWB is taking"
Well, frankly, there is no honorable position a conservative can take on this ports deal - either pro or con, at least the way the deal unfolded.
If you are conservative and supported it:
* You implicitly support big government advocating for deals that ought to be left in the private sector
* By advocating early you appear to have little concern for security issues
If you are conservative and are against it:
* You are against the free-flow of capital
* You implicitly agree that Congress/gov't in general should have review powers over investments.
By reacting hysterically in putting the veto issue on the table so quickly, GWB made a significant tactical blunder which allowed the Democrats a win-win (from their point of view)
The real issue is how americans have the expectation that government should be involved in financial transactions - and that they are so ignorant of how a capitalist system works (or should work)
This was a demonstration of how ingrained socialism is within the average Americans thought process.
No, there was no good solid conservative position to be taken in this deal, once the veto was on the table.